Category: Anti Civil Rights ideas & “Friends”

Categories
All About Guns Another potential ENEMY OF THE PEOPLE Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends"

President Biden’s Fantasy Gun Control Agendaby Jim Grant

By Larry Keane

Under Oregon's Measure 114, 'Common Sense Gun Safety' Means Shutting Down Gun Sales
IMG iStock-1327769366

Where the Answers are Made Up and the Second Amendment Doesn’t Matter

1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, we have a problem. The President is on the loose again, uttering nonsense about the Second Amendment.

President Joe Biden spoke to a collection of political donors as he’s gearing up his 2024 re-election campaign and used his gun control grindstone to churn out well-worn and discredited Second Amendment tropes. The problem is – it’s all malarky. No kidding, man.

President Joe Biden might just be the lying dog-face pony soldier he accuses others of being.

F-16s and AR-15s

The president belittled Americans who agree that the Second Amendment exists to prevent a tyrannical government from usurping power from the people.

“You know, I love these guys who say the Second Amendment is — you know, the tree of liberty is water with the blood of patriots. Well, if [you] want to do that, you want to work against the government, you need an F-16. You need something else than just an AR-15,” said President Biden, according to Fox News.

Aside from the veiled threat to use actual weapons of war against the American people, President Biden’s swipe at Americans who value their rights was intended to target the lawful ownership of Modern Sporting Rifles (MSRs). There are over 24.4 million MSRs in circulation today. They’re the most popular-selling centerfire rifle in America.

Second Amendment Second Thoughts

“We have to change,” President Biden said. “There’s a lot of things we can change because the American people, by and large, agree you don’t need a weapon of war. I’m a Second Amendment guy. I taught it for four years, six years in law school. And guess what? It doesn’t say that you can own any weapon you want. It says there are certain weapons that you just can’t own. Even when it was passed, you couldn’t own a cannon. You can’t own a machine gun.… No, I’m serious.”

First, he’s overselling his authority as a law professor. President Biden briefly served as Benjamin Franklin Presidential Professor of the Practice at the University of Pennsylvania for two years between his terms as vice president and his campaign for The White House, according to a fact check by the Austin American-Statesman. He was paid $900,000, and his duties “involved no regular classes and around a dozen public appearances on campus, mostly in big, ticketed events,” the Philadelphia Inquirer reported.

His description as a “Second Amendment guy” might come as a surprise to other “Second Amendment guys.” That doesn’t normally include ideas like universal background checks that would require a national firearm owner registry, restrictions that would ban entire classes of firearms, repealing the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) to allow frivolous lawsuits against firearm manufacturers for the criminal misuse of lawfully sold firearms by remote third parties or – as the president points out here – a clear ignorance of the National Firearms Act.

Fox News reported correctly, that the Second Amendment makes no mention of firearm restrictions. Gun control laws at the federal level didn’t start until 1934, when the National Firearms Act was signed by President Franklin Roosevelt. That’s 143 years later.

Americans can legally own machine guns, although it is extremely restricted. No automatic firearm produced after May 1986 is available for commercial sale, but those produced before then can be – and are – legally owned. Owners have to pay a $200 tax stamp and register them with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF).

When it comes to cannons, well, President Biden blasted that one too. It was legal to own a cannon when the Second Amendment was ratified in 1791. It’s still legal to own one today.

President Biden made the same erroneous claim in April 2022 and in June of 2021, when The Washington Post fact checked him on that one. He earned “Four Pinocchios,” writing, “Biden has already been fact-checked on this claim — and it’s been deemed false. We have no idea where he conjured up this notion about a ban on cannon ownership in the early days of the Republic, but he needs to stop making this claim.”

Rapid-Fire Falsehoods

None of this is new. President Biden, who claims to own two shotguns, is hardly the Second Amendment expert he presents himself to be. He once told his wife she should “fire two blasts” of a shotgun blindly into the air if she felt threatened. That’s terrible and dangerous legal advice. Among the four fundamental firearm safety rules is to know your target and what is beyond.

This advice was actually invoked in a court case, where the accused, Jeffrey Barton, was charged with aggravated assault. Prosecutors ended up dropping those charges and instead charged him with police obstruction, of which he was convicted.

President Biden once argued to ban 9 mm Glocks, claiming in an interview with Charlie Rose that he could kill more people with a .38-caliber revolver. He also oddly told police they should shoot “unarmed” attacking criminals wielding knives “in the leg.” Police ripped that suggestion. Fox News reported the Fraternal Order of Police said it was “completely ridiculous,” “unrealistic” and a “pandering talking point.”

President Biden didn’t stop there. He believes that 9 mm handguns are especially dangerous.

“A 9 mm bullet blows the lung out of the body,” President Biden said. “The idea of a high caliber weapon, there is simply no rational basis for it in terms of self-protection, hunting.”

The president’s 9 mm claim was debunked as “bullsh*t,” by a federal agent with 15 years of service. Another with 20 years said, “Not possible.” A 21-year veteran of the U.S. Marshal fugitive recovery task force told Breitbart that President Biden’s claim is, “… not even in the realm of possibility.”

That’s the problem with President Biden. He’s living in a fantasy world of utter nonsense.

About The National Shooting Sports Foundation

NSSF is the trade association for the firearm industry. Its mission is to promote, protect and preserve hunting and shooting sports. Formed in 1961, NSSF has a membership of thousands of manufacturers, distributors, firearm retailers, shooting ranges, sportsmen’s organizations, and publishers nationwide. For more information, visit nssf.org

National Shooting Sports Foundation

Categories
All About Guns Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends" You have to be kidding, right!?!

Special Report: Biden Weaponizing IRS Into a Well-Armed Paramilitary Force by Lee Williams

Special Report: Biden Weaponizing IRS Into a Well-Armed Paramilitary Force, iStock-1203186874
Special Report: Biden Weaponizing IRS Into a Well-Armed Paramilitary Force, iStock-1203186874

U.S.A. — Iowa Senator Joni Ernst introduced a bill last week titled “Why does the IRS Have Guns Act,” which would prohibit the IRS from buying or storing guns and ammunition, transfer all IRS firearms to the General Services Administration so they could be auctioned off to licensed gun dealers to reduce the national debt, and move the agency’s Criminal Investigation Division to the control of the Justice Department.

“The taxman is fully loaded at the expense of the taxpayer,” Ernst said in a statement. “As the Biden administration has worked to expand the size of the IRS, any further weaponization of this federal agency against hardworking Americans and small businesses is a grave concern. I’m working to disarm the IRS and return these dollars to address reckless spending in Washington.”

While the outcome of Ernst’s legislation is not promising – Joe Biden will likely veto her bill, should it ever reach his desk – the Senator’s efforts have drawn much-needed attention to the massive arsenal that the IRS has amassed – is amassing.

The IRS is preparing for battle. Some of the weapons and tactical equipment currently in their inventory are used by elite military commandos, not American law enforcement officers. To be clear, none of this extreme militarization occurred until after Biden took office.

“Who are they preparing to battle?” asked Adam Andrzejewski, CEO and Founder of OpenTheBooks.com, the largest private repository of U.S. public-sector spending. Andrzejewski’s watchdog efforts have led to federal legislation, grand jury indictments, congressional hearings, subpoenas and convictions, as well as audits by the Government Accountability Office and Congressional Research Service reports.

“It looks like it’s for domestic tax and law enforcement objectives, but the IRS has blurred the lines between civil and administrative agencies, civil and administrative duties and federal law enforcement capability. After grabbing legal power, the IRS is amassing firepower. It’s time to scale back the federal arsenal,” Andrzejewski told the Second Amendment Foundation’s Investigative Journalism Project Wednesday.

In one recent report, Andrzejewski found that IRS has spent $35.2 million taxpayer dollars on guns, ammunition and tactical gear since 2006, but the agency’s purchasing increased dramatically under Biden.

“The years 2020 and 2021 were peak years at the IRS for purchasing weaponry and gear. Just since the pandemic started, the IRS has purchased $10 million in weaponry and gear,” the report states.

The purchases included:

  • $2.5 million on ballistic shields and various other gear for criminal investigation agents
  • $1.3 million for tactical lights, tactical gear bags, ballistic helmets and body armor
  • Nearly $1 million on Smith & Wesson M&P15s and Beretta tactical shotguns
  • 3,000 tactical holsters for handguns with optical sights and weapon lights (As of this week, the IRS only has 2,100 armed agents.)

Trigger-pullers wanted

The IRS is recruiting people who won’t hesitate to put another American behind their front-sight post.

In a recent job posting, the agency says special agent candidates, “must be willing to use force up to and including the use of deadly force.”

Those who qualify will receive the best guns and gear taxpayer dollars can buy.

Here is a partial list of some of the agency’s recent purchases.

Night Vision Rifle Scopes

American law enforcement – even the IRS – does not operate with Rules of Engagement like the military when it encounters armed resistance. The last time law enforcement used ROE rather than the law, things went very wrong. Whatever the tactical situation, police are subject to criminal laws and deadly force policies, which are predicated upon the sanctity of human life.

Force – up to and including deadly force – must be reasonable. An American law enforcement officer must use the minimum amount of force necessary and can use deadly force in defense of their life or the life of another. Verbal warnings and other de-escalation attempts are always considered after deadly force is used to determine whether the force was justified.

That said, it’s difficult to understand why the IRS is equipping its agents with night vision rifle scopes, which are capable of hitting man-sized targets at distance in total darkness.

How does shooting a suspect who is hundreds of yards away and unaware of an agent’s presence – at night, without warning – comply with use-of-force statutes and policies? How is this not murder? What tactical problem are the night vision rifle scopes intended to resolve?

Ballistic Shields

When the threat level is extreme, such as a report of an active shooter, SWAT teams will deploy a ballistic shield, which is designed to complement their personal body armor and further reduce the threat.

Ballistic shields come in all shapes and sizes and are rated by bullet resistance. A Level II shield will stop 9mm and other handgun rounds. A level IV shield will stop .30 caliber armor-piercing ammunition. The greater the bullet resistance, the heavier the shield. Operators must train constantly to carry the shield and shoot a pistol one-handed. It’s awkward and requires a lot of practice.

The Los Angeles Police Department has guidelines concerning the use of ballistic shields. Officers must first pass a Ballistic Shield Operator course before they can carry one into harm’s way. The course specifies the type of tactical situations where a ballistic shield should be deployed. They include but are not limited to the following:

  • Breaching (doors and windows)
  • High-risk vehicle stops
  • High-risk handcuffing
  • Door entries
  • Room clearing
  • Hallway movement
  • Rescuing wounded officers under fire

These types of tactical situations are the purview of SWAT teams and military special forces, not the IRS.

What’s in the IRS’s Gun Safe

The IRS issues Smith & Wesson M&P15 rifles to most of its special agents. It’s a good, serviceable patrol carbine – more than adequate for most needs. However, the agency issues HK416s to select agents. The difference between an M&P15 and an HK416 is staggering. Smith & Wesson designed their carbine for civilian end users. Heckler & Koch designed the 416 for special operations forces. It is currently the weapon of choice for the most elite units in the world, including Tier One JSOC teams. IRS even issues Heckler & Koch magazines with the rifles, which are much more reliable, but cost as much as 10-times more than traditional AR magazines.

Why do IRS agents need the same rifle carried by Navy SEALs or members of the Army’s most elite special missions unit?

While the IRS issues .40 cal. Glock handguns to its agents, documents show the agency has purchased a limited number of 5.7x28mm handguns and ammunition, although the type of ammunition has not been specified.

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives classifies the 5.7x28mm SS190 duty round, which has a steel penetrator, as armor-piercing handgun ammunition. The manufacturer restricts the ammunition to military and law enforcement customers.

The 5.7x28mm weapon system gives IRS agents the capability of defeating most civilian body armor with a handgun.

IRS Responds

The Second Amendment Foundation’s Investigative Journalism Project asked the IRS to explain why they need ballistic shields, HK416s, night vision rifle scopes and other highly specialized equipment.

Here is their response:

“IRS-CI special agents are sworn federal law enforcement officers who conduct criminal investigations into tax violations, money laundering, cybercrimes, as well as organized crime involving drugs and gangs.

 

The agency’s approximately 2,100 IRS-CI special agents regularly execute and serve search, arrest, and seizure warrants; conduct covert operations; and interact with the public in law enforcement settings.

 

They must participate in annual firearms training, briefings, and practical exercises to demonstrate they are proficient to carry firearms. Firearms and related tactical gear are – and have been – necessary equipment for CI special agents for more than 100 years,” said Carissa Cutrell, a member of the IRS Criminal Investigation division.

Takeaways

It’s clear the IRS geared up so they could start raiding.

Last week a joint IRS/ATF team raided Highwood Creek Outfitters in Great Falls, Montana. ATF agents were prohibited from seizing the gun shop’s 4473s, but the IRS agents weren’t. They seized hundreds of the forms.

Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen expressed concern over the seizure, asking, “What the hell does the IRS need with 4473s?” By now, I’m sure he realizes they were all handed over to the ATF.

History has shown us that whatever a federal agency buys, it will eventually use. The only question is who will IRS point their HK416s and night vision rifle scopes at now that the raids have begun.

Most Americans are sick of watching Biden weaponize federal agencies to further his partisan political objectives. The ATF was weaponized first, and they’re going door-to-door right now, conducting unconstitutional knock-and-talks under the guise of firearm inspections.

If Joe Biden is allowed to fully weaponize the IRS like he did the ATF, he will be able to exert his executive authority whenever he wants without congressional oversight. Anyone who objects or complains could be shot without warning, at distance, at night, without ever seeing who fired the fatal round.

As Senator Ernst noted, this is a grave concern.

About Lee Williams

Lee Williams, who is also known as “The Gun Writer,” is the chief editor of the Second Amendment Foundation’s Investigative Journalism Project. Until recently, he was also an editor for a daily newspaper in Florida. Before becoming an editor, Lee was an investigative reporter at newspapers in three states and a U.S. Territory. Before becoming a journalist, he worked as a police officer. Before becoming a cop, Lee served in the Army. He’s earned more than a dozen national journalism awards as a reporter, and three medals of valor as a cop. Lee is an avid tactical shooter.

———————————————————————————–  WOW A “a grave concern” , what no hope & prayers? Like that will really help a lot in this fight! All I can say is until we start throwing some of these ass clowns in a cell with Bubba fo a LONG TIME.* Nothing is going to change for the better for this country. Grumpy

*

Categories
Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends" Born again Cynic! Cops Paint me surprised by this

FIREARMS INDUSTRY REACTS TO HUNTER BIDEN GUN CRIMES DEAL WRITTEN BY HANDGUNNER STAFF

“DO AS WE SAY, NOT AS WE DO”

In a world in which politicians would like the American public to believe no one is above the law, the government has once again demonstrated justice is not equitable, and leaders throughout the firearms industry are calling them out on it.

On Tuesday, it was announced the Department of Justice (DOJ) reached a plea agreement with Hunter Biden, son of President Joe Biden, to avoid prosecution for illegally possessing a firearm as an admitted drug user.

Hunter Biden’s plea agreement to misdemeanor tax offenses allows him to avoid federal felony charges for lying on a background check form when he purchased a firearm. Hunter Biden was an illegal user of crack cocaine at the time, which made him ineligible to legally purchase or possess a firearm.

The punishment for the felony offense of lying on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) Form 4473 is up to 10 years in prison and a $250,000 fine. Not to mention, the firearm Hunter Biden purchased was later disposed of in a public trash can.

In a statement released by the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), the organization criticizes the agreement as it comes at the same time the Biden administration is punishing firearm retailers by revoking licenses and terminating livelihoods for minor clerical errors with its “zero-tolerance” policy.

“Under this administration’s ‘zero tolerance’ policy, licensed firearm retailers have had their lives destroyed for paperwork mistakes far less egregious than buying a gun when you are a crack addict,” said Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF’s Senior Vice President and General Counsel. “They are not serious about reducing gun violence, only scoring cheap political points. It is worth noting this announcement came today, after President Biden’s appearance in Hartford last Friday to call for gun control.”

During the appearance, President Biden once again called on Congress to pass unconstitutional gun control measures that would ban an entire class of commonly-owned semiautomatic rifles and allow for suing members of the firearm industry.

The Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms released a statement in response calling the deal “an insult to the intelligence of the American people.”

“Why should anybody respect any gun laws if the president’s son gets a pass,” CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb questioned. “The American public should be outraged at what amounts to a deplorable double standard.

“It is important to note that none of the gun prohibition lobbying groups have uttered a word of condemnation,” he continued. “This fact alone shows what hypocrites they are, and what a hypocrite Joe Biden is. Their silence is deafening.”

Gottlieb noted how President Biden has spent his entire political career campaigning for strict gun control, including bans on so-called “assault weapons” and more recently, an acknowledged effort to prevent the sale of 9mm pistols. But the rules evidently change when the president’s son is involved in a federal gun crime that would result in fines and imprisonment for up to 10 years for anybody else who knowingly lied about not being a prohibited person, to obtain a handgun.

“If Joe Biden wasn’t president,” Gottlieb said, “Hunter Biden would be heading to jail. Looks like the biggest loophole of them all is to violate a federal gun law when you’re the president’s son.”

The CCRKBA chairman also said the gun ban lobby’s silence on this case should erase any influence they have on the nation’s gun law policies.

“The anti-gun-rights movement, from Joe Biden on down through all of the billionaire-backed gun control groups have just lost whatever credibility they ever had, and ever will have, by not immediately denouncing this deal,” Gottlieb stated. “These elitist anti-gunners must never again be taken seriously by the public, the media or members of Congress and state legislatures when they advocate for tougher gun laws, while remaining silent about the Biden gun crime loophole.”

Categories
A Victory! Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends" Cops

Dad Defends Daughter from Attacker on Father’s Day by KIMBER PEARCE

A North Carolina dad took action on Father’s Day when he fatally shot an intruder who had threatened his young daughter, according to local Police.

After receiving report of a breaking and entering in progress and shots fired, Wilson Mills police officers and Johnston County sheriff’s deputies arrived at the scene shortly after 9 p.m.

Joco reports talked to Police Chief A.Z. Williams, who stated preliminary investigations have occurred.

It appears the suspect had entered the backyard of the residence. He encountered three children playing outside and he targeted the 11-year-old daughter.

The other two children rushed indoors to alert their parents.

Shots Fired

The suspect followed the children and attempted to force himself into the house, violently shaking the door handle. In response, the homeowner took action and shot the intruder.

The identity of the 23-year-old suspect has not yet been disclosed.

The suspect was attended to by emergency personnel, but NRA reports indicate he died. Williams emphasized that the family had no prior knowledge of the attacker.

The homeowner fully cooperated with the investigating detectives and was not taken into custody, the sheriff’s office confirmed. Fox News informs us that this case is being viewed as a self-defense situation.

According to ABC11, Williams noted that this incident is one of the rare violent occurrences during his five-year tenure at the Wilson’s Mills Police Department.

Be Prepared – Even on Father’s Day

An article from Hager & Schwartz tells us that violent crimes are most likely to happen during the summer. This statement cites multiple reasons, including heat and increased drinking.

Next, another statistic from the US Department of Justice informs us that “3 out of 4 people will become victims of a completed or attempted assault.” In other words, citizens need to always be ready and capable of defending themselves.

This father was put in a position to defend his children. He had prepared himself by knowing how to use his firearm, and he definitely put it to use that day.

This Father’s Day incident serves as a reminder of how important the fathers – and the guns – in our lives are.

Categories
All About Guns Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends" Cops

How Likely is an American to Die in a Mass Shooting? by KONSTADINOS MOROS

How likely is an American to die in a mass shooting? It really depends on which measure you use.

According to Gun Violence Archive (GVA), across 646 mass shootings in 2022, 642 people were killed. That fact alone should already give you some indication of how they count these things – GVA defines mass shootings as any incident where 4 or more are shot, not including the shooter. As a result, their list is mostly gang violence incidents, many of which involved no one being killed, just injuries. According to Excel, the average is .993808 deaths per GVA “mass shooting.”

Anyway, even taking that 642 figure, that means the average American had a 0.19 in 100,000 chance of dying in a mass shooting in 2022. In other words, about 1 in 500,000.

But let’s say you aren’t a gang member, and are more concerned with what people actually mean when they say “mass shooting”. I.e., some lunatic walks into your grocery store, school, movie theater, etc. and begins a rampage. How likely are you to be killed in an incident like that?

The Mother Jones database is an excellent tool for that question. It limits it to incidents (1) where three or more are killed, (2) involved a lone shooter (with some obvious exceptions, like San Bernardino), (3) were carried out in a public place, and (4) gang-related crime is excluded. To be sure, Mother Jones’s measure still isn’t perfect. I do think some incidents where less than three are killed are still mass shootings by the common understanding of such incidents. But Mother Jones’s definition comes close to what most people mean when they say “mass shooting.”

By the Mother Jones definition, 74 people died in mass shootings in 2022. That’s about 0.02 per 100,000. Or roughly one for every five million people.

Mass shootings are tragedies that get massive media attention. But they are a very unlikely way to die, especially if you aren’t involved in criminal activity.

Original source:

Categories
All About Guns Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends" Being a Stranger in a very Strange Land California Cops You have to be kidding, right!?!

Los Angeles City Council Arrests Point to ‘Criminals for Gun Control’ Mentality by David Codrea

“Each weapon recovered could mean one fewer victim of violence!” Price gushed about an L.A. “buyback.” Charges against him, including for embezzlement and perjury, may be indicators of how believable his claims about anything are. (Curren D. Price, Jr./Facebook)

U.S.A. — “Democratic LA city councilman charged with embezzlement, conflict of interest in latest political scandal,” Fox News reported Thursday. “Curren Price is the latest member of the Los Angeles City Council to be arrested in recent years.”

Price is accused of voting to approve projects “in which he had a direct financial interest,” with his wife receiving more than $150,000 in undisclosed payments from developers, and of “having the city pay for medical benefits for his now wife while he was still married to another woman,” the story elaborates. All in all, he’s “facing five counts of embezzlement, three counts of perjury, and two counts of conflict of interest.”

So naturally, he doesn’t trust his constituents with guns, exploiting a so-called “buyback” with the Los Angeles Police Department to gain himself some free publicity while not making a bit of difference in the violent crime Angelenos live under (and bafflingly, vote for with their choice of “leaders”). It wasn’t his first.

“Certainly in South L.A. I feel that gun violence is the No. 1 public health issue,” Price said at a press conference for a 2017 event. “Buyback programs like this really underscore the importance of getting guns off the street. It’s just amazing the number of weapons that are turned in.”

Not that they do anything but fraudulently make it look like city “leaders” are taking charge. No less an “authority” than the National Institute of Justice has admitted:

“Buybacks are ineffective unless massive and coupled with a ban… 1. The buybacks are too small to have an impact. 2. The guns turned in are at low risk of ever being used in a crime. 3. Replacement guns are easily acquired. Unless these three points are overcome, a gun buyback cannot be effective.”

“Price is fighting to ensure our justice system works for everyone, not just the wealthy and well-connected,” his campaign website advertised, hitting on all the right “progressive” buzzwords to gin up resentment and stir up support for doing everything but address the real issues behind criminal violence.

“He has fought to bring more accountability reforms at LAPD to stop racial profiling and police misconduct, especially against young Black and Latino men. He’s led efforts to crack down on guns and successfully secured funding for at-risk youth and foster programs, gang intervention, and crime prevention. And he’s fought for investment in mental health, addiction treatment, job training, and education – not more jails and incarceration.”

“I am a firm believer in the control of guns, the restraint of guns, and the federal government’s proposal for the regulation of guns,” Curren told Our Weekly in 2013 in a report on the “Gun Culture on South L.A.”

But what about the other council members? The story says he’s “the latest” to be arrested:

“Mark Ridley-Thomas was found guilty of conspiracy, bribery, and fraud in March of this year… José Huizar pleaded guilty in January to one count of conspiracy to violate the RICO Act and one count of tax evasion [and] Mitchell Englander was convicted in 2021 of scheming to falsify material facts after he attempted to cover up lavish gifts and services he received from business interests.”

Are you ready to not be surprised?

“Ridley-Thomas also wants the group to explore options to better enforce existing and/or adopt stricter gun control restrictions and penalties… ‘especially related to sale or possession of semiautomatic guns and military-style assault weapons,’” The Daily Breeze reported. “He gave several examples of possible regulations, such as deeper background checks for gun sales, requirements for those who purchase guns to buy insurance to cover any taxpayer expenses incurred from the ‘injurious use of a gun’ or taxes on ammunition and firearms.”

This is what Huizar and the rest of the council didn’t trust Angelenos with, per Gunsandammo.com:

“L.A. bans the POSSESSION of mags holding more than 10 rds. in city limits… People who currently possess such magazines, many for collectible firearms registered decades ago, have a 60-day window to remove them from the city, sell them to a legal gun dealer, or turn them into the Los Angeles Police Department.”

And let’s not forget phony Mitchell Englander lending his support to banning phony guns, pulling the phony “even one gun surrendered” BS at a phony “buyback” event, and trying to outlaw 3D printed weapon files and block citizens who were against it from seeing what he was up to.

These lawbreaking “lawmakers” join a long line of others, starting with Mike Bloomberg’s Criminal Mayors Against Your Guns, and extending up the political food chain to “anti-gun” gun-running racketeer Leland Yee and beyond.

It’s really no wonder that such political predators don’t trust citizens with guns. Knowing you can’t be trusted means no one can be: It’s called “projection.”  And it’s also called “survival instinct” when wolves demand “commonsense horn safety” laws.

About David Codrea:

David Codrea is the winner of multiple journalist awards for investigating/defending the RKBA and a long-time gun owner rights advocate who defiantly challenges the folly of citizen disarmament. He blogs at “The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance,” is a regularly featured contributor to Firearms News, and posts on Twitter: @dcodrea and Facebook.

David Codrea

Categories
All About Guns Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends" Being a Stranger in a very Strange Land California

I have to say that they are consistant!!! San Francisco supervisors introduce local “carry killer” ordinance By Cam Edwards

San Francisco supervisors introduce local "carry killer" ordinance
AP Photo/Jeff Chiu
Thanks in large part to California’s old “may issue” laws and the rampant hostility towards the Second Amendment in the Bay Area, the number of licensed concealed carry holders in San Francisco is incredibly small. Under the old regime the San Francisco Sheriff’s Office basically refused to issue any permits, and since the Bruen decision was handed down applications have been trickling, not pouring, into the office. The Wall St. Journal reported back in February that fewer than 300 residents had submitted their applications to date, and many of them were experiencing lengthy wait times in processing.

It’s not law-abiding gun owners who are to blame for San Francisco’s violent crime, in other words, but that’s not stopping some supervisors in the city from pointing the finger at concealed carry holders in response to several recent shootings in the city, including one in which nine people were injured last weekend. On Tuesday Supervisor Catherine Stefani and City Attorney David Chiu rolled out a new ordinance that would prevent the handful of people with active permits from lawfully carrying in many publicly accessible places, including virtually all commercial establishments by default.

Flanked by Chiu and several members from gun safety advocacy groups Moms Demand Action and United Playaz, a local violence-reduction group, Stefani took aim at the controversial ruling, calling it a “dangerous step backwards and a gross misinterpretation of the Constitution” by a “rogue” Supreme Court.

“Every day gun violence takes lives, devastates families and destroys communities across our nation,” she said. “I’m tired of thoughts and prayers. I’m tired of the memorials. I’m tired of the inaction by those who are beholden to the gun lobby. The Second Amendment is not a suicide pact.”

Stefani’s ordinance marks another likely clash between advocates for gun safety and Second Amendment activists.

The legislation would make it a misdemeanor punishable by up to six months in jail and/or a $1,000 fine to carry concealed firearms in so-called “sensitive spaces,” such as city buildings, hospitals, schools, churches, banks, playgrounds and parks, as well as private businesses whose owners bar firearms — dramatically expanding existing bans. Stefani planned to introduce the legislation to the Board of Supervisors at Tuesday’s meeting.

If gun control could stop “gun violence” San Francisco would be the safest place in the United States. The city has blocked gun stores from operating inside the city limits, there are no public gun ranges in the city, and it’s smack-dab in the middle of the state with the most restrictive gun laws in the nation.

Despite that, San Francisco still sees its share of gun-involved crime, including the aforementioned shooting in the Mission District. Police aren’t looking for a concealed carry holder in that case; instead, they’re looking for a convicted felon who has multiple arrests for drugs and weapons and who has been able to largely escape consequences for his previous criminal acts thanks to the soft-on-crime attitudes of state and local lawmakers and prosecutors.

While retailers are closing up shop due to rampant theft and residents are searching for safer pastures outside the city limits in order to escape the progressive dystopia, supervisors like Stefani are now trying to make it impossible for those who remain to defend themselves with a firearm beyond the confines of their home.

The inevitable lawsuits to come will almost certainly end up with most of these “gun-free zones” tossed out, but the anti-2A ideology that’s behind their introduction will remain in place, and it’s going to take years of activism and engagement before San Francisco is forced to recognize the fundamental nature of our right to keep and bear arms.

—————————————————————————————- Clint Eastwood was a prophet in his own land. When he made the Dirty Harry Films oh so long ago! Where he decried the early signs of rot in his hometown. As it is you could not pay me to visit Sodom by the bay! Grumpy

Categories
All About Guns Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends" Born again Cynic! California Cops You have to be kidding, right!?!

Bank of America Turns Over Information on Gun Owners to the FBI by John Crump

Bank of America Turns Over Information on Gun Owners to the FBI iStock-471503379
Bank of America Turns Over Information on Gun Owners to the FBI, iStock-471503379

WASHINGTON, D.C. — FBI whistleblowers have come forward with damning allegations against Bank of America (BoA). According to Representative Thomas Massie (R-KY) and Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), the banking giant has been revealing information to the FBI about its customer’s gun purchases without a warrant. Now the pair has sent letters to other banks to see if they also violated the privacy rights of their customers.

After the protest at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021, Bank of America provided the FBI with a list of customers who made transactions in or around Washington, D.C., purchased a flight to the Nation’s Capital, or booked a hotel room in the Washington D.C. metropolitan area. Most of Bank of America’s customers that attended the large rally never entered the Capitol Building, and the FBI did not have probable cause to allow the law enforcement agency to get a court order for the bank to surrender the documents.

When the FBI approached BoA about turning over the records, the bank complied without requesting a court order.

The megabank would put anyone in or around D.C. and purchase a gun on the top of the list. By simply being in or around D.C. on January 6 and purchasing a firearm using a BoA product, the FBI would mark you for investigation. The FBI investigated many BoA customers without a court order and with the full cooperation of Bank of America.

“In a transcribed interview, retired FBI Supervisory Intelligence Analyst George Hill testified that BoA, ‘with no directive from the FBI, data-mined its customer base’ and compiled a list of BoA customers who used a BoA product during a specified date range. Mr. Hill further noted that ‘on top of that list, they put anyone who had purchased a firearm during any date.’ Mr. Hill also testified that the list that BoA provided targeted transactions in Washington D.C., and the surrounding area,” the letter reads.

The letter was sent to JPMorgan Chase & Co, Citigroup, Truist Financial Corporation, Wells Fargo, U.S. Bancorp, and PNC Financial Services. The Congressmen are asking the banks to provide any documents or communications about the release of customer data from the January 6, 2021, timeframe to the FBI or any other federal law enforcement agencies.

This request is to see if the other major banks of similar size leaked the same customer information to the federal authorities that Bank of America released.

“Congress has an important interest in ensuring that Americans’ private information is protected from collection by federal law enforcement agencies without proper due process. The Committee and Select Subcommittee must understand if, how, and to what extent financial institutions, including PNC Financial Services, worked with the FBI to collect Americans’ private data,” the letter reads.

Many are concerned that the FBI is becoming overtly political and weaponized against anyone the Biden regime considers enemies. We have seen the weaponization of the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) against conservative non-profits. The FBI has also used documents like the discredited “Steele Dossier” to get FISA warrants to surveil political opponents. Some of those concerned about the weaponization of government agencies are serving in Congress.

It should concern all Americans (not only gun owners) that big business is working hand and hand with big government. Instead of protecting its customers’ data, it turns it over to the surveillance state without a fight. Gun owners now know that Bank of America is not protecting their data from an ever-encroaching government. The only question now is how far the rot goes.

About John Crump

John is a NRA instructor and a constitutional activist. John has written about firearms, interviewed people of all walks of life, and on the Constitution. John lives in Northern Virginia with his wife and sons and can be followed on Twitter at @crumpyss, or at www.crumpy.com.

John Crump

Categories
All About Guns Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends" You have to be kidding, right!?!

Why did armed IRS agents raid a gun store in Great Falls? ‘Soviet-style intimidation raid’ sparks outrage By Nikita Nikhil

IRS and ATF. (Photos via Getty Images)
IRS and ATF. (Photos via Getty Images)

An investigation conducted by the Internal Revenue System (IRS) on a Great Falls, Montana, gun dealer has sparked outrage online. On June 14, twenty fully armed agents from the IRS and the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms raided a gun shop called Highwood Creek Outfitters, based in Great Falls, where reportedly, the feds spent hours searching records.

While ATF denied answering any questions, the agency confirmed the happening of an investigation at Van Hoose’s gun shop.

Matt Rosendale

I met with Tom Vanhoose this morning after 20 armed IRS agents raided his store in Great Falls earlier this week.

Tom informed me that these agents confiscated all the 4473 forms, none of which contain any financial information; instead, the IRS now has access to these forms… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…

View image on Twitter
View image on Twitter
“IRS Criminal Investigation was on site as part of their official business.”

While speaking to media outlet The Truth About Guns, Hoose said that the agents had been summoned from as away as Idaho and Denver just to issue a warrant for his financial records.

Discussing the alleged reason for the warrant, Van Hoose said that the IRS claims that he had under-reported his income and failed to make them aware of his millions of dollars of revenue. He denied the allegations stating anyone who runs a guns retail business knows there isn’t much extra revenue at the end.

Matt Rosendale sent a strongly worded letter to the IRS and the ATF

Chuck Callesto

JUST IN: 20 armed IRS agents raid Great Falls gun store — Took NO FINANCIAL RECORDS, accounting or tax statements just every 4473 BUYER’S INFORMATION form..

While speaking to The Truth About Guns, Van Hoose said that his shop remained closed on June 14 while the agents copied information from his computer. He also added that the IRS and the ATL agents seized 4473 forms – used to conduct a NICS background check – dating back to 13 years and noted down his gun acquisition and disposition diary.

The incident infuriated U.S. Rep. Matt Rosendale who sent a letter to IRS Commissioner Daniel Werfel and ATF Director Steven Dettelbach and called it “outrageous.” The letter further read:

Matt Rosendale
The weaponization of our government must be STOPPED, which is why I sent a letter to ATF Director Dettelbach and IRS Commissioner Werfel demanding answers about this outrageous attack and have used every tool available to me to remove funding for the 87,000 additional IRS agents!
View image on Twitter
View image on Twitter
11059
3280

“Under Director Dettelbach’s leadership of the ATF, a pattern of intimidation and harassment against hardworking Americans has emerged – Montanans will not tolerate these political witch hunts. I remind both Director Dettelbach and Commissioner Werfel that Congress has the power of the purse, and I will ensure that funding for these agencies is not weaponized against the American people,” Rosendale said in his letter. I request that the ATF and IRS cease conducting these Soviet-style intimidation raids.”

After the news of Van Hoose’s firearm shop being raided by the feds went viral, Twitterati was furious. Several politicians slammed the federal agencies and Joe Biden‘s administration for funding the branches to conduct abrupt research.

Others also joined the bandwagon of the above-mentioned politicians and criticized the federal agencies.

Screenshot of Lauren Boebert's tweet criticizing the abrupt raid on Van Hoose's shop.
Screenshot of Lauren Boebert’s tweet criticizing the abrupt raid on Van Hoose’s shop.
Screenshot of Marjorie Taylor Greene's tweet criticizing the abrupt raid on Van Hoose's shop.
Screenshot of Marjorie Taylor Greene’s tweet criticizing the abrupt raid on Van Hoose’s shop.
Screenshot of D.C. Draino's tweet criticizing the abrupt raid on Van Hoose's shop.
Screenshot of D.C. Draino’s tweet criticizing the abrupt raid on Van Hoose’s shop.
Screenshot of a Twitter user criticizing the abrupt raid on Van Hoose's shop. (Photo via @ChuckCallesto/Twitter)
Screenshot of a Twitter user criticizing the abrupt raid on Van Hoose’s shop. (Photo via @ChuckCallesto/Twitter)
Screenshot of a Twitter user criticizing the abrupt raid on Van Hoose's shop. (Photo via @ChuckCallesto/Twitter)
Screenshot of a Twitter user criticizing the abrupt raid on Van Hoose’s shop. (Photo via @ChuckCallesto/Twitter)
Screenshot of a Twitter user criticizing the abrupt raid on Van Hoose's shop. (Photo via @ChuckCallesto/Twitter)
Screenshot of a Twitter user criticizing the abrupt raid on Van Hoose’s shop. (Photo via @ChuckCallesto/Twitter)
Screenshot of a Twitter user criticizing the abrupt raid on Van Hoose's shop. (Photo via @ChuckCallesto/Twitter)
Screenshot of a Twitter user criticizing the abrupt raid on Van Hoose’s shop. (Photo via @ChuckCallesto/Twitter)
Screenshot of a Twitter user criticizing the abrupt raid on Van Hoose's shop. (Photo via @ChuckCallesto/Twitter)
Screenshot of a Twitter user criticizing the abrupt raid on Van Hoose’s shop. (Photo via @ChuckCallesto/Twitter)

As per the Truth about Guns, Van Hoose’s shop was up and running the day after the investigation.

Categories
All About Guns Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends"

Is gun control making Vermont less safe?

Up until 2018, deep blue Vermont was a model for sensible gun laws – meaning they had few and politicians on both sides of the aisle understood the tranquil state didn’t need any. Vermont was the original Constitutional Carry state, as the Right-to-Carry without a permit was affirmed in a 1903 state supreme court case. In 2017 Vermont ranked 49th in violent crime – ahead of only Maine.

Then in 2018, Vermont lawmakers rejected the state’s independent tradition to become just another New York satrapy. That year politicians enacted a ban on commonly-owned firearm magazines and criminalized the private transfer of firearms (sometimes inaccurately termed “universal” background checks). The legislature also instituted “Red Flag” gun confiscation orders that deprive a person of their Second Amendment rights without due process.

This year, the Empire State’s Green Mountain Colony enacted a 72-hour waiting period on firearm purchases. The move provides gun owners with further evidence that gun control advocates intend to build ever more restrictions on top of any private transfer restriction scheme.

According to CDC fatal injury data, the total number and crude rate of “violence-related firearm deaths” (which includes suicides) increased from 2017 to 2021. Both the total number and crude rate of “violence-related firearm deaths” fell during the same period in neighboring New Hampshire. In Vermont, from 2017 to 2021 “violence-related firearm deaths” among kids ages 0-26 increased 40 percent.

According to FBI data, the violent crime rate increased in Vermont from 2017 to 2020. From 2017 to the first full year of Vermont’s 2018 gun control measures (2019) the violent crime rate rose by nearly 20 percent. Over the same period, New Hampshire’s violent crime rate fell by 19 percent. Maine’s violent crime rate also fell over this period. For 2021, Vermont slipped to 48th in violent crime, with New Hampshire taking the 49th slot and Maine taking 50.

So, do Vermont’s ridiculous gun control laws make the state less safe? To the extent these laws inhibit the ability of law-abiding individuals to defend themselves, yes. Is the data presented above strong evidence that gun control is making Vermont, in general, less safe? No. At best it’s mildly indicative of what common sense would dictate – that Vermont’s gun control measures had no salutary impact whatsoever in the already peaceful jurisdiction.

The point of laying out this information is to draw attention to how political advocates and the media can manipulate data to construct whatever preexisting narrative they want. While in this case accurate statistical information was used to concoct a pro-gun narrative, gun control advocates and their media lapdogs employ the same tactics to argue the reverse.

Above is an example of bivariate analysis, where only two variables are compared. In this case, years pre- and post-gun control are compared with firearm injury and violent crime data. Such analysis doesn’t consider the myriad other variables that could be having an impact on firearm injury and violent crime. Some might include criminal justice and law enforcement practices or changes in economic circumstances.

Further, starting and ending points for statistical analysis and what variables to highlight can be cherrypicked. This is particularly problematic in smaller or more peaceful jurisdictions, as when the small total number of firearm-related incidents vary by year, the percent increase or decrease in total and the rate of such incidents per 100,000 population will vary wildly.

However, this doesn’t mean that the more sophisticated statistical modeling that comes out of the academy is of any use either. More sophisticated models offer further opportunities for cherry-picking and other manipulation.

Concocting sophisticated statistical models presents a nearly endless array of choices, and each decision leads to other different choices. This concept is sometimes presented as the “garden of forking paths.” In practice, this means that different researchers presented with the same exact data will come to wildly different conclusions.

A 2022 study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences titled, “Observing many researchers using the same data and hypothesis reveals a hidden universe of uncertainty,” illustrated this point.

To construct their experiment, the authors assembled 161 researchers in 73 teams and provided them with the same data and hypothesis to be tested.

Explaining the results of the experiment, the authors reported,

Results from our controlled research design in a large-scale crowdsourced research effort involving 73 teams demonstrate that analyzing the same hypothesis with the same data can lead to substantial differences in statistical estimates and substantive conclusions. In fact, no two teams arrived at the same set of numerical results or took the same major decisions during data analysis.

In other words: Much of social science is of dubious value, even before trying to account for political bias. Of course, when it comes to guns the academy favors more control.

In 2022, Reason magazine did an excellent job of exposing almost all “gun violence” social science for the junk science it is by producing an accessible video explainer on the topic.

Drawing on the expertise of statistician and New York University and University of California at San Diego instructor Aaron Brown and a 2020 analysis by the RAND Corporation, the video explained that the vast majority of gun violence research is not conducted in a manner sufficient to offer meaningful conclusions. An article accompanying the video, written by Brown and Reason Producer Justin Monticello, noted,

A 2020 analysis by the RAND Corporation, a nonprofit research organization, parsed the results of 27,900 research publications on the effectiveness of gun control laws. From this vast body of work, the RAND authors found only 123 studies, or 0.4 percent, that tested the effects rigorously.

Reason and Brown examined the remaining 123 studies from the RAND analysis and offered the following,

We took a look at the significance of the 123 rigorous empirical studies and what they actually say about the efficacy of gun control laws.

The answer: nothing. The 123 studies that met RAND’s criteria may have been the best of the 27,900 that were analyzed, but they still had serious statistical defects, such as a lack of controls, too many parameters or hypotheses for the data, undisclosed data, erroneous data, misspecified models, and other problems.

The gun issue aside, the problems inherent in the type of modeling presented here, the academy’s obvious political bias, and the replication crisis have led to increasing doubts about whether large swathes of the social sciences have any value at all.

So how is a normal gun owner supposed to wade through this statistical and social science “sea of trash?” Meet any data presented by gun control advocates and their servants in the academy and media with the utmost skepticism. Moreover, recognize that law-abiding Americans have a right to keep and bear arms protected by the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution that is independent of the professed benefits of any gun control measure.